User talk:Daldidandal

Welcome!

Hello, Daldidandal, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Han River (Korea) did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! AntiDionysius (talk) 13:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added citations for everything, what seems to be the problem exactly? I'm new to this since this edit is my first post, but most of the things I've changed are either backed with a primary source or sources from the korean gov't Daldidandal (talk) 16:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't add citations for everything; most entire paragraphs you added were not accompanied by citations. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

well yeah since I added the citations on the headings. Most of what I'm posting is a direct translation from government-backed websites, which include the whole sections, not only the paragraphs Daldidandal (talk) 16:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citations don't go on headings, they go after the material, and they're expected usually every couple of sentences, not every couple of paragraphs.

Also, you can't directly translate material from government websites. That would be a copyright violation, and just a stylistic problem - Wikipedia is not a place for transcribed material. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:19, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's a copyright violation as I'm paraphrasing korean content into English. However I will try to cite more often. Daldidandal (talk) 16:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paraphrasing is still an issue. Wikipedia pages are meant to be written in your own words, using the facts from sources but not the structure and wording of the source. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's no copyright problem. Turns out This is all '공공누리' or some public copyright act. I don't know how much paraphrasing is 'bad' paraphrasing but I read multiple sources on one subject,write it all down on a page on microsoft word, so I do 'write' the thing. No offense, please get off my back. Daldidandal (talk) 16:49, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Han River (Korea), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It may not have been your intention, but one of your edits, specifically one that you made on Han River (Korea), may have been a change that some consider controversial. Due to this, your edits may have been reverted. When making possibly controversial changes, it is good practice to first discuss your edit on the article's talk page before making it, to gain consensus over whether or not to include the text, phrasing, etc. If you believe that the information you added was correct, please initiate that discussion. You have made very substantial changes that seem to be generating controversy. I'd suggest discussing your goals on the article's talk page before making these sweeping reforms. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:09, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

what? where is it generating controversy? I don't understand how such a poorly stitched-together article, which was seriously lacking quality information in the first place for a quite significant river & not really that contested from what I can tell by looking at the edit history, can cause so much trouble. Is there some political agenda behind this>>? Everything is backed either by the local gov't or cited. I'm going to revert it back to my own edit, with adding what I changed on the talk page, but if you think I've made controversial changes I'd like you to tell me where & what the controversy is Daldidandal (talk) 07:26, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]